Xi Jinping’s aggressive moves against India ‘unexpectedly flopped’: Report

A US-based magazine’s news report has said that Chinese President Xi Jinping is the “architect” of recent aggressive moves against India and by doing so he has risked his future with high-profile incursions into Indian territory that “unexpectedly flopped” in the face of ferocious fightback by the Indian Army.

“Xi already roiling the Communist Party with a “rectification” campaign and mass persecution of foes, will launch “another brutal purge” following the Chinese Army’s failures on the Indian border,” the report said.

“Unfortunately for Xi, he is the “architect” of these aggressive moves into India and his People’s Liberation Army (PLA) has unexpectedly flopped. The Chinese army’s failures on the Indian border will have consequences,” it said, adding that the recent developments give Xi an excuse to pick up the pace of replacing adversaries in the armed forces with loyal elements.

“More important, the failures motivate China’s aggressive ruler, who as chairman of the Party’s Central Military Commission, is the leader of the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) and the ruling Communist Party of China, to launch another offensive against Indian positions.”

“Beijing is accustomed to getting its way in disputed territory, especially because Indian leaders and soldiers, “psychologically paralyzed” by their loss in the 1962 border war with China, played only defense,” it said, adding, “Paralyzed no more. China is thought to have suffered at least 43 deaths in the Galwan clash.”

The Ground Force does not have a track record of success in contested situations, claimed the US magazine. “Its last major engagement was in 1979 when, in the effort to “teach Vietnam a lesson,” the Chinese launched what they called a “defensive counterattack” into Vietnamese territory and, in the process, were repelled and humiliated by their much smaller neighbor.”

“Now, after decades of an unprecedented modernization effort, the Ground Force is far better equipped and trained, but it is apparently not much more effective on the battlefield”, claimed the report.